Sex Lives Must Be Regulated!

[nbcrusader]

Affairs at Work Subject to Suits

In a significant expansion of sexual harassment law in California, the state high court unanimously decided that any worker, male or female, could suffer sexual harassment even if his or her boss never asked for sexual favors or made inappropriate advances.

Previously, only the worker who had the affair or received unwanted sexual attention could prevail in California.

"Widespread favoritism based upon consensual sexual affairs may imbue the workplace with an atmosphere that is demeaning to women because a message is conveyed that managers view women as 'sexual playthings,' " Chief Justice Ronald M. George wrote for the court.

In such a situation, other employees may believe "that the way required to secure advancement is to engage in sexual conduct with managers," he added.

Shannon B. Nakabayashi, who represented California employers in the case, said the decision would result in employers monitoring office romances, even those between employees of the same rank, for fear of being sued for tolerating a sexually charged work environment.

Companies must now know if their employees are having "affairs" or face the consequences.

 

[financeguy]

"Widespread favoritism based upon consensual sexual affairs may imbue the workplace with an atmosphere that is demeaning to women because a message is conveyed that managers view women as 'sexual playthings,' " Chief Justice Ronald M. George wrote for the court.

Well, if this Justice is correct in his supposition (and, curiously he does not even mention that it could also appy to a female superior/male subordinate), I greatly doubt if judicial interference is the way to deal with the issue.

 

[all_i_want]

oh this is such a baloney. if these are decent companies they will enforce the principle that people are promoted based on merit, otherwise, where would this end? an employee could say another employee was promoted not because the boss was involved with her, but because he had his hopes up for a FUTURE relationship. now, that actually is a stronger supposition, since the guy would be doing a favour to get in bed with the favoured. why not apply the same thing to all office relationships and ban any affair in the offices? that would be removing office, where a significant portion of people spend a significant portion of their lives, from the list of potential places for meeting someone. is that what these people are trying to do?

 

[nbcrusader]

If such principles existed, we would live in a better world.

Sexual Harrassment laws only address some bad acts in the workplace - there are plenty other bad actss that are tacitly approved (by lack of statutory or regulatory structure) due to lack of "protected class" status for an individual.

Now, we all get upset when the Executive or Legislative branches of government regulate sexual behavior, but when the Judiciary does so, it goes by silently.

 

[DaveC]

Admittedly though, nbc, this is a whole lot less inflammatory than anything Santorum ( ) has said in the past while. And the Executive and Legislative branches are elected, while most high-level Judicial positions (at least as far as I know...no judicial positions are elected in Canada) are not elected.

Therefore, the Executive and Legislative branches have to answer to the people more so by virtue of Democracy than the Judicial branch does.

But I still see some pretty outraged people here, myself included.

 

[Doozer61]

i am having a relationship with someone at work, in my same office. and my ex was also a city employee, although in a different department/building.

 

[Irvine511]

don't shit where you eat ... don't fuck where you work?

 

[xtal]

I know my sex life must be regulated.

 

[Doozer61]

don't shit where you eat ... don't fuck where you work?

no one told me that rule

when i was with donna, she worked for the city and i was in my 20 year stint at an insurance agency. donna and i were together 5 years when i started working for the city. her at the harbor dept, me at the health dept. we broke up and i met caron at the health dept in my office!

 

[melon]

How amusing. Hundreds of years of government sticking its nose into the legality of gay sex, and now that the tables have turned into the hetero realm, look who's bitching? I see it as just desserts, frankly.

The news station where I work is nothing but a cauldron of office romances. I quite find it unprofessional, but it's also a very easygoing workplace. It works for them, I guess.

Melon

 

[Liesje]

Don't most companies that actually care already have "no fraternizing" rules in place on their own?

 

[Angela Harlem]

I think this is great. Companies should be allowed to fully dive into all personnel's affairs. What employees do with each other in their personal space infringes entirely on the office or workplace around them. Think abut it. If you know that 2 of your colleagues are shagging in the carpark at lunchtime, it will have an adverse affect on your work. It will probably be the eventual undoing of the sancity and safety of the workplace, allowing colleagues to shag each other like rabbits. This must become public knowledge.

Intervention.

 

[nbcrusader]

How amusing. Hundreds of years of government sticking its nose into the legality of gay sex, and now that the tables have turned into the hetero realm, look who's bitching? I see it as just desserts, frankly.

The news station where I work is nothing but a cauldron of office romances. I quite find it unprofessional, but it's also a very easygoing workplace. It works for them, I guess.

Melon

In many states, this would not be limited to heterosexual affairs.

 

[Irvine511]

In many states, this would not be limited to heterosexual affairs.

but i thought that homosexuals don't exist in the eyes of the federal government ...